The Maratha reservation issue in Maharashtra has again taken center stage, with fresh waves of protest, political sparring, and legal debate highlighting the complexities of affirmative action in India. On Saturday, August 30, 2025, NCP (SP) president Sharad Pawar called for a Constitutional amendment to resolve the long-standing demand for Maratha reservation, arguing that only such a step could offer a permanent solution for the aggrieved community. His remarks, delivered in Ahmednagar, set off a flurry of responses from political rivals, legal experts, and activists, underscoring the deep divisions and high stakes surrounding the issue.
Pawar’s pitch for a Constitutional amendment was both direct and pointed. "The amendment to the Constitution would pave the way for finding a permanent solution to the Maratha reservation issue. The Centre should take the initiative for this to resolve the issue," he stated, according to reporting by The Indian Express. Drawing a comparison with Tamil Nadu, Pawar noted, "Tamil Nadu has exceeded the 50 percent limit by giving 72 percent quota in the state. It has been upheld by the apex court. If Tamil Nadu can do it, why not Maharashtra?" For Pawar, the crux of the matter lies in addressing the socio-economic distress faced by Marathas, who are predominantly dependent on agriculture. As he put it, "Marathas are essentially dependent on agriculture and farming. With shrinking agriculture land holdings and financial distress, it has compounded problems for the Marathas. To secure their lives they are seeking reservation."
He further explained, "Smaller land holdings coupled with decline in farm production is adversely affecting farming communities. They feel reservation will help them secure education and employment." Pawar’s advocacy reflects growing frustration among Marathas, who argue that without government intervention, their prospects for social mobility and economic security will remain bleak.
Yet, Pawar’s proposal drew swift criticism from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). A senior BJP minister, speaking anonymously to The Indian Express, countered, "Pawar has cleverly put the ball in the Centre’s court. He knows once a Constitutional amendment is done, it will no longer apply for the Maratha community alone. There will be demand for reservation from all states to accommodate communities which are agitating for long. Such a decision will multiply the problems and generate unrest across the country." The BJP’s skepticism highlights fears that opening the door to a nationwide quota expansion could spark a wave of similar demands, threatening both social harmony and the delicate balance of India’s reservation system.
Meanwhile, the agitation on the ground has shown no signs of abating. On August 30, talks between Maratha quota activist Manoj Jarange Patil and a state government-appointed delegation ended in deadlock, with Patil continuing his hunger strike at Mumbai’s Azad Maidan. According to India Today, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis tried to reassure protestors, promising that their demands would be addressed "within the legal and constitutional framework" as the agitation entered its second day. However, a court ruling restricting the protest to 5,000 participants for just one day was fiercely contested by Patil, further intensifying an already charged political atmosphere.
Patil’s core demand is the granting of Kunbi status to Marathas—a move that would make them eligible for reservation under the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category. He referenced historical records from the Hyderabad and Satara gazettes to support his claim, arguing that Marathas in Marathwada should be recognized as Kunbis. However, retired Justice Sandeep Shinde, sent by the government to negotiate, clarified, "Caste certificate is given to individuals and not the entire community," and emphasized that such decisions fall under the jurisdiction of the backward class commission. Jarange, for his part, lambasted the government’s approach, calling the deployment of Justice Shinde for talks "an insult of the government, Raj Bhavan and the state." He remained adamant, describing the current agitation as the community’s "final fight" for reservation.
As protests swept through Mumbai—causing traffic jams, road blockades, and massive gatherings outside the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation office—political leaders weighed in. Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut argued, "If the Maratha community leader Jarange Patil's protest in Mumbai has been extended by one day, then it is not a favour. The Chief Minister, along with the entire cabinet, should speak directly with Jarange Patil." The extension of the Justice Sandeep Shinde Committee’s tenure by six months on September 1, tasked with examining the possibility of granting Kunbi certificates based on historic records, signaled the government’s intent to keep the dialogue open, but did little to quell public discontent.
Legal experts, meanwhile, have weighed in on the practical hurdles facing any attempt to expand reservation for Marathas. According to a Times of India report, Senior Counsel S G Aney explained that only a Constitutional amendment could overcome the Supreme Court’s 50 percent cap on reservations. Aney pointed out that defining "socially and educationally backward" status varies not just between states but even within regions of Maharashtra. "What constitutes socially backward in one state, say, even in Maharashtra, may not in another remote region of the country," he observed. Aney stressed that any such move would require empirical data—potentially from a national census—to scientifically establish the need for additional quotas.
The last national census in India was conducted in 2011, and the constitutional requirement for a decennial census has not been met since then. This gap complicates efforts to gather the data necessary to justify new reservation policies. The state government has tried to address this by appointing the Justice S S Shukre committee, which is currently hearing public interest litigations against the Maharashtra government’s 10 percent Maratha quota under the SEBC Act for education and public jobs.
Adding to the legal and political complexity, Fadnavis has reiterated that the 10 percent quota for Marathas under the SEBC category, granted in 2024, remains in force. He also reminded the public that during his previous tenure as Chief Minister (2014-2019), Maratha reservation under the SEBC Act was enacted and that all welfare schemes for Marathas were sanctioned during his time in office. The Eknath Shinde-led government (2022-2024) continued to address these issues, according to Fadnavis.
Yet, the path forward remains uncertain. Experts caution that any new legislation would have to navigate the complex distribution of federal power, as states currently decide which communities are considered backward. As Aney noted, "The legislation would not be easy and would involve questions of distribution of federal power because, as of now, each state has the power to decide who or which community within its area is backward. It is difficult for the Centre to determine which corner of a state is backward."
With the Maratha agitation showing no signs of abating, and with political, legal, and social stakes running high, Maharashtra finds itself at a crossroads. Whether a Constitutional amendment, empirical data collection, or a new consensus among political factions can break the impasse remains to be seen. For now, the Maratha community’s demand for reservation continues to reverberate across the state, shaping the political landscape and testing the resilience of India’s affirmative action framework.
